Although I thought it was a shitty farce of a movie, that was the thing I liked. There actually was real punishment, even if it got a little far-fetched with the bomb suppository. :p

Has anyone here ever seen the 1998 version of Les Miserbales with Liam Neeson, Geoffry Rush and Uma Thurmond?


Don Cardi

Recommending a modest, low-budget English film will perhaps fall on deaf ears for some, but if you like to see a little justice done in film, watch Dead Man's Shoes (2004), my review of which can be found here (reply 5 in the thread) . I'd rate it the best film of 2004, and a far more complex, riveting, better and well-made film than the appalling Man on Fire (2004).

Mick

Vozvrashcheniye/The Return *** (1st Time)
2003, Zvyagintsev, Russia
After a twelve year absence, a father returns to see his sons, and takes them on a mysterious trip to the country.
A foreboding drama of regret and hostility as a result of time and caution. Its sombre tone and slow pacing is in contrast to the beautiful cinematography of the North Russian landscapes; imagery, feel and performances are likely to linger in the mind for days after.

Mick

Just got done watching Tales From the Crypt Season 1 and I really enjoyed it. I wasn't expecting much from this series but I really did enjoy it. I had never before seen these episodes and most of them were surprisingly good (except the last episode).

Modern Times #81 on the AFI Top 100 List

This was my first Charlie Chaplin movie that I saw in its entirety. It was good and I did like the way the movie was shot. I liked the way it was kind of fast paced/sped up and the fact that it was a slight movie. The story to me was boring and the comedy again was not my kind of comedy. Overall a good movie and I did enjoy it but I was also bored

Then I guess all your other Chaplin proviews will be bad then, especially on his fully silent ones.

Probably. In fact that's what I've grown to expect from any of the 1930s & 1940s comedies because they're mostly screwball, right? Not trying to put it down but as I've stated, it's just not my cup of tea. Again I did enjoy the movie overall just not the comedy aspect of it

Many silent comedies were slapstick comedies, while many sound ones from the 30's and such were screwball. They're not my type of comedy either, but they are still good/great films (depending on which you're watching). In fact, the Marx Bros. are the only ones I really laugh at heavily, but I don't dismiss other ones as bad because of the generation gap. It's their charm that I admire, especially films like The Philadelphia Story.

I've noticed that 90% of the films you've seen from the 50's and before were "good, not great" or something similar.

Because most of them are to me, except for Frankenstein that was great

Best film of the month so far:

Crossfire **** (1st Time)
1947, Dmytryk, US
An anti-semitic soldier drunkenly kills a Jew. Two other soldiers are also suspected.
Gripping, compelling thriller driven by strong visuals and terrific acting. The dialogue and night-for-night cinematography are a treat to behold; it is also a B movie notable for daring to tackle such a touchy subject as racial hatred.

Mick

Everyone, TCM is playing two films tonight, one I've seen and one I'm probably gonna tape.

Double Indemnity (best film-noir ever) and Don Siegel's Invasion of the Body Snatchers. Invasion of the Body Snatchers is supposed to be great, although I have yet to see it.

My opinion on Siegel's film:

Invasion of the Body Snatchers ****
1955, Siegel, US
A small town is taken over by aliens.
One of those rare occasions where every technical detail fits together perfectly to produce a compelling, low budget masterpiece. Powerfully executed science fiction, it is the epitome of Cold War paranoia.

Mick

Yeah, I hear it's Siegel's best film.

A review on Double Indemnity by me, perhaps to enhance your viewing, should anybody watch it on TCM tonight...

Double Indemnity
Dir. by: Billy Wilder
Country: USA
Year: 1944
Running time: 103 minutes

“I never knew that murder could smell like honeysuckle.”

Film noir was a term first coined by the French critics of the mid-forties who, at the end of World War II, saw for the first time the influx of American crime films, in which they saw many recurring ingredients. The term film noir itself translates to “black film,” a reference to the defining ingredient of the new-found genre: darkness. Not only were the films physically set almost entirely at night, but the tone of the plot would also involve deception, corruption, and crime of the highest order, a murder most unspeakable and vices unrepeatable. The aesthetic approach was a combination of French poetic realism and German expressionism. The plots were complex, often presented in flashback, with voiceover, told from the male protagonist’s point of view: the detective, private eye or cynical tough man who, upon meeting a mysterious, ambiguous female lead, was lead on a downward journey which only unravelled fully at the disastrous climax.

This is the first of three Wilder masterpieces which made the MFA Top 100. ¹ It would of course be impossible to choose one masterpiece as his most definitive; but Double Indemnity must be close. The film is also, along with The Maltese Falcon (1941), and Farewell My Lovely and Laura of 1944, the epitome of the genre.

Walter Neff (that’s two F’s, like Filadelfia) is an insurance salesman, and by the look and sound of it, one who won’t last much longer. Talking into his Dictaphone, he tells claims adjustor Barton Keyes of his doomed affair with Phyllis Dietrichson. Through flashback, we learn that Neff’s client Mr. Dietrichson doesn’t like insurance. But Neff has fallen in love with Mrs. Dietrichson, and will do anything for her—even when she suggests they murder her husband and claim on the insurance. It all goes right up to a point, but this is film noir, and there are no happy endings. Things soon derail and go all wrong…

It seems odd that, since Raymond Chandler co-wrote the script, the plot is a simple one—that is, at least you can follow it. But that doesn’t mean it’s any worse. On the contrary, Chandler and Wilder’s script gives way to fewer, fuller characters who drive the sinister narrative along through the planning an execution of the murder itself, and then in the nail biting aftermath, in which Keyes creeps in on them like a determined predator, and Neff and Dietrichson’s loyalty to each other is pushed to the limit.

The script (based on James Cain’s novel), as those of you familiar with Chandler can imagine, is full of typically hardboiled cynicism. Memorable lines, repartees and first-person voice over are peppered throughout; Neff and Phyllis’ flirting by means of an extended metaphor of a speeding motorist is a notable highlight. Complimenting such a fine screenplay is Wilder’s archetypal directing: the cold, dispassionate standpoint, firm and assured, and frustratingly sweeping in its manipulative handling of the narrative and our constant projection into it.

And of course, with such a classic noir, cinematography is a must. Without it, Wilder’s directing would have been wasted. John Seitz’s black and white photography is astounding and goes hand-in-hand with the direction to capture the Chandleresque setting of a corrupt Los Angeles. Sharp camera angles, distant at time and appropriately up close at others, help to make the film simultaneously stylistic and realistic. Not many films can do that. Stark shadows are evident throughout, another classic trademark of the genre, and of course the light slicing into characters’ faces and bodies through half-shut Venetian blinds. Fantastic. Miklos Rozsa’s musical score never puts a note wrong: exciting, intense and complimentary throughout.

As fantastic as the direction is, as masterful as the script is, as archetypal as the cinematography and score are, the film wouldn’t be half as good without the acting, notably that of the three main stars. Fred MacMurray holds the piece together with an inspired performance as Neff, a character whose anti-hero was virtually an hitherto unknown concept. He could have easily played Marlowe in a Chandler adaptation. His loner yearning for a challenge is played to perfection. Complimenting the role is Barbara Stanwyck as the femme fatale, clad in a fake blonde wig and wearing a dangerously attractive anklet.

But Edward G. Robinson, as Neff’s companion Keyes, steals the show. Rattling off lines with lip-smacking relish, he offers brilliant and welcome comic relief in an otherwise dark study of human evil. Pun intended, he’s quite simply unmatched…

Much like Wilder, and the film itself.

Thanks for reading,
Mick
---
1. = The other two Wilder films on the list are Sunset Boulevard (1950) and Some Like It Hot (1959).

Great review on it too. Double Indemnity is the definitive film-noir. Everything from the narration to the femme fatale.

I might write a MFA review while I record the films tonight, since we've sloped on writing them, but then again that means I have to put off A Woman Under the Influence another day.

Yeah, I intend to catch up with them very soon...I watched Metropolis last week with the intention of writing a review on it. I can't seem to write anything coherent right now, though, unless it's fictional.

Mick

I see Invasion is also playing tomorrow at six PM, so I'll do that tomorrow and only tape Double Indemnity tonight. Also, I'm gonna tape Burton's Ed Wood, which is playing late tomorrow night.

The Wild Bunch #80 on the AFI Top 100 List

Another movie that I didn't like. I felt like falling asleep during this one tonight. I don't know which one was worse, Modern Times or this one?

I rented this movie but I was only able to see the first few scenes. Has anybody seen it? What do you think?

Irish, did you see the Director's Cut? I shall be watching that soon, too. Shall let you know what I think.

Tony Love, I have Prizzi's Honor. Despite its critical acclaim, this black comedy runs thinly with no sense of where it wants to go until too far into the movie, by which time no one gives a damn.

Mick

Yes I believe it was the Director's cut. I liked the directing and the editing (whenever someone would die they would shoot something else getting shot and show each falling down second by second). But again, storyline wise I was bored of my bottom

I have only seen parts of The Wild Bunch, which I generally enjoyed. I still have to watch it in full on my shitty flipper DVD. It's supposed to be one of the greatest westerns ever.

Charlie and the Chocolate Factory

I had high hopes this movie would be good from all the reviews I had heard about and read. Unfortunately it didn't live up to the hype IMO. I didn't hate it (so DV was wrong) :p but it wasn't great either. As a movie by itself it was good and fun for the family. However, when you compare it to the original it's nothing more than an unnecessary 2005 version of a classic that didn't need a remake, no matter how much closer to the book it is than Willy Wonka and the Chocolate Factory. I love Depp and was excited to see his performance but I was disappointed in it as well with his little 'laugh' and his comments that lacked any sort of real nastiness on his part. Don't even get me started on the Oompa Loompa's. That was the worst part of the movie IMO and dreaded seeing them on screen. The only songs in the movie was when they were on screen but they were horrible! I'm surprised they weren't just remix songs of Brittany Spears or the Backstreet Boys. If they release this DVD in a 2-pack with Wonka I'll purchase it but I probably won't purchase just this movie by itself.

Constantine

Another movie that I was looking forward to and heard good things about and yet another movie that I was disappointed with. I think Rachel Weisz and Keanu Reeves did fine jobs with their characters but again the story just became boring and too uninteresting for me towards the halfway point of the movie.

The Beatles Anthology 3

This was the DVD that I was looking forward to the most because it talked about the British invasion to America. This was a lot more interesting to me than Volumes 1 & 2 and I'm looking forward to watching #4

A Woman Under the Influence - (John Cassavetes;1974;USA) - ****
A man tries desperately tries to keep stability in his family while his wife's erratic behavior escalates.
So far, Cassavetes' most compelling film. Gena Rowlands' performance is excellent, and one of the best from an actress I've ever seen. Peter Falk is also astonishing, like Rowlands bringing forth a truly honest performance. The subtle character development is also something to praise Cassavetes for. Although I wouldn't say it's one of the ten best ever, it's up there in the top 20 or 30. A raw, and brutally honest depiction of family madness. One of the most important dramas I've seen.

One film left in the boxset now, Opening Night.

Well, I've seen mixed reviews from the board and elsewhere, but it sounds like I might be seeing Charlie and the Chocolate Factory tomorrow with my mom. I'll admit, both of us are probably mainly going to see Depp, and not even for his talent as an actor (if you know what I mean... ), which is probably even worse, but hopefully we'll end up enjoying the movie, itself.

Waterloo ** (1st Time)
1970, Bondarchuk, It/USSR
Events leading up to and including the historically famous battle.
The opening sequences have an air of importance and authenticity; it soon wanes (the final hour comprises the battle itself), with a muddled narrative perspective and a stellar cast which can only have been to disguise the cardboard theatrics. As ambitious as it is ultimately tedious.

Mick

Ed Wood - (Tim Burton;1994;USA) - ***1/2
A biopic on the "worst director ever," Ed Wood jr. who made horrible B-Movies, but had an admirable passion for filmmaking.
Oddly enough, I think this is better then Batman Returns, but not a four star movie. I feel like I overrated BR, and this is IMO Burton's best. I love the celebration, rather then spoof of him. Johnny Depp plays Ed Wood with great enthusiasm, and Burton's direction is great. The opening credits are excellent, along with the musical score. At times it's also delightfully funny. Martin Landau is the best actor in this film however, as Bela Lugosi.
#27